None.
13:41:52 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/08/11-rdfa-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/08/11-rdfa-irc ←
13:41:54 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
13:41:56 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 7332 ←
13:41:56 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 19 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 19 minutes ←
13:41:57 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Web Applications Working Group Teleconference
13:41:57 <trackbot> Date: 11 August 2011
13:51:37 <manu> Chair: Manu
13:52:06 <manu> Guest: Stéphane (scor) Corlosquet
13:52:06 <manu> Guest: Henri (bergie) Bergius
13:52:06 <manu> Guest: Niklas (lindstream) Lindström
13:52:06 <manu> Guest: Toby (tinkster) Inkster
13:57:50 <manu> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/pu
13:52:27 <manu> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Aug/0019.html
13:55:03 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
(No events recorded for 13 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started ←
13:55:10 <Zakim> +??P5
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P5 ←
13:55:25 <gkellogg> zakim, ??P5 is me
Gregg Kellogg: zakim, ??P5 is me ←
13:55:25 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +gkellogg; got it ←
13:55:39 <manu> scribenick: gkellogg
(Scribe set to Gregg Kellogg)
13:55:42 <manu> Scribe: Gregg
13:56:15 <Zakim> +??P6
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P6 ←
13:57:00 <manu> zakim, I am ??P6
Manu Sporny: zakim, I am ??P6 ←
13:57:00 <Zakim> +manu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu; got it ←
13:57:11 <Zakim> + +68185775aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +68185775aaaa ←
13:57:27 <SebastianGermesin> Zakim, I am aaaa
Sebastian Germesin: Zakim, I am aaaa ←
13:57:27 <Zakim> +SebastianGermesin; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SebastianGermesin; got it ←
13:57:33 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
13:57:33 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
13:57:34 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
13:59:23 <Zakim> + +1.781.866.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.781.866.aabb ←
13:59:47 <Zakim> +??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12 ←
14:00:12 <niklasl> zakim, I am ??P12
Niklas Lindström: zakim, I am ??P12 ←
14:00:12 <Zakim> +niklasl; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +niklasl; got it ←
14:00:58 <manu> zakim, who is on the call?
Manu Sporny: zakim, who is on the call? ←
14:00:58 <Zakim> On the phone I see gkellogg, manu, SebastianGermesin, Ivan, +1.781.866.aabb, niklasl
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see gkellogg, manu, SebastianGermesin, Ivan, +1.781.866.aabb, niklasl ←
14:01:22 <manu> zakim, aabb is scor
Manu Sporny: zakim, aabb is scor ←
14:01:23 <Zakim> +scor; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +scor; got it ←
14:03:43 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
Ivan Herman: zakim, who is here? ←
14:03:43 <Zakim> On the phone I see gkellogg, manu, SebastianGermesin, Ivan, scor, niklasl
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see gkellogg, manu, SebastianGermesin, Ivan, scor, niklasl ←
14:03:46 <Zakim> On IRC I see tomayac, MacTed, scor, Zakim, RRSAgent, tinkster, bergie, niklasl, ivan, manu1, trackbot, SebastianGermesin, gkellogg, manu
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see tomayac, MacTed, scor, Zakim, RRSAgent, tinkster, bergie, niklasl, ivan, manu1, trackbot, SebastianGermesin, gkellogg, manu ←
14:03:48 <Zakim> +Aharon
Zakim IRC Bot: +Aharon ←
14:03:51 <Zakim> +??P24
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P24 ←
14:04:23 <ivan> zakim, mute Aharon
Ivan Herman: zakim, mute Aharon ←
14:04:23 <Zakim> Aharon should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Aharon should now be muted ←
14:04:36 <ivan> zakim, unmute Aharaon
Ivan Herman: zakim, unmute Aharaon ←
14:04:36 <Zakim> sorry, ivan, I do not know which phone connection belongs to Aharaon
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, ivan, I do not know which phone connection belongs to Aharaon ←
14:04:38 <tomayac> zakim, P24 is me
Thomas Steiner: zakim, P24 is me ←
14:04:38 <Zakim> sorry, tomayac, I do not recognize a party named 'P24'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, tomayac, I do not recognize a party named 'P24' ←
14:04:44 <ivan> zakim, ??P24 is ShaneM
Ivan Herman: zakim, ??P24 is ShaneM ←
14:04:44 <Zakim> +ShaneM; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +ShaneM; got it ←
14:04:49 <tomayac> zakim, 24 is me
Thomas Steiner: zakim, 24 is me ←
14:04:49 <Zakim> sorry, tomayac, I do not recognize a party named '24'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, tomayac, I do not recognize a party named '24' ←
14:05:00 <ivan> zakim, Aharon is tomayac
Ivan Herman: zakim, Aharon is tomayac ←
14:05:00 <Zakim> +tomayac; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +tomayac; got it ←
14:05:06 <ivan> zakim, unmute tomayac
Ivan Herman: zakim, unmute tomayac ←
14:05:06 <Zakim> tomayac should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: tomayac should no longer be muted ←
14:05:12 <Zakim> + +1.781.273.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.781.273.aacc ←
14:05:25 <MacTed> Zakim, aacc is OpenLink_Software
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, aacc is OpenLink_Software ←
14:05:25 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software; got it ←
14:05:29 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
14:05:29 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
14:06:17 <manu> Topic: Plan for RDFa 1.1 Progress
14:06:29 <gkellogg> ivan: TAG updates, we have been asked by "other people" to wait until next week or the week after, where they may be a schema.org announcement.
Ivan Herman: TAG updates, we have been asked by "other people" to wait until next week or the week after, where they may be a schema.org announcement. ←
14:06:48 <gkellogg> … awaiting answers until end of next week, if we don't have answers by then, we'll see where the TAG stands on the issue.
… awaiting answers until end of next week, if we don't have answers by then, we'll see where the TAG stands on the issue. ←
14:07:06 <Zakim> + +3539149aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: + +3539149aadd ←
14:07:14 <gkellogg> … next option is to go with the TAG group only if search engine people and the rest of the people that have adopted RDFa/Microdata/Microformats are a part of it.
… next option is to go with the TAG group only if search engine people and the rest of the people that have adopted RDFa/Microdata/Microformats are a part of it. ←
14:07:22 <manu> zakim, aadd is Knud
Manu Sporny: zakim, aadd is Knud ←
14:07:22 <Zakim> +Knud; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Knud; got it ←
14:07:29 <manu> zakim, mute Knud
Manu Sporny: zakim, mute Knud ←
14:07:29 <Zakim> Knud should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Knud should now be muted ←
14:07:40 <gkellogg> … without the search engines, then whatever the TAG does would be ignored by HTML5 WG.
… without the search engines, then whatever the TAG does would be ignored by HTML5 WG. ←
14:08:26 <gkellogg> … my personal opinion is that if the TAG is ignored, then we must finish RDFa 1.1 with discussed changes and accept that there will be two formats around HTML 5 (Microdata and RDFa)
… my personal opinion is that if the TAG is ignored, then we must finish RDFa 1.1 with discussed changes and accept that there will be two formats around HTML 5 (Microdata and RDFa) ←
14:09:24 <gkellogg> manu: so it seems the plan going forward is to wait for schema.org issues to resolve themselves, which they might, otherwise get search engine companies involved with all other companies deploying RDFa/Microdata, otherwise, TAG group won't happen and we will go forward with both RDFa and Microdata.
Manu Sporny: so it seems the plan going forward is to wait for schema.org issues to resolve themselves, which they might, otherwise get search engine companies involved with all other companies deploying RDFa/Microdata, otherwise, TAG group won't happen and we will go forward with both RDFa and Microdata. ←
14:09:33 <tomayac> is everyone aware of this blog post: http://blog.schema.org/2011/07/on-june-2-nd-we-announced-collaboration.html
Thomas Steiner: is everyone aware of this blog post: http://blog.schema.org/2011/07/on-june-2-nd-we-announced-collaboration.html ←
14:13:56 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
14:14:06 <manu> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
14:14:08 <niklasl> Anyone seen this? http://www.jenitennison.com/blog/node/162
Niklas Lindström: Anyone seen this? http://www.jenitennison.com/blog/node/162 ←
14:14:11 <ivan> ack niklasl
Ivan Herman: ack niklasl ←
14:14:15 <ShaneM> q+ to ask about timeline
Shane McCarron: q+ to ask about timeline ←
14:15:03 <gkellogg> ivan: This is Jeni's private opinion, not the TAG's position.
Ivan Herman: This is Jeni's private opinion, not the TAG's position. ←
14:15:36 <manu> ack ShaneM
Manu Sporny: ack ShaneM ←
14:15:36 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to ask about timeline
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to ask about timeline ←
14:15:50 <gkellogg> shanem: we're already way past our timeline, what is it?
Shane McCarron: we're already way past our timeline, what is it? ←
14:17:47 <gkellogg> ivan: W3C and TAG hopes to have a plan in a couple of weeks.
Ivan Herman: W3C and TAG hopes to have a plan in a couple of weeks. ←
14:17:49 <gkellogg> manu: It's been a "couple of weeks" for a couple of weeks.
Manu Sporny: It's been a "couple of weeks" for a couple of weeks. ←
14:18:38 <manu> q+ to discuss a likely timeline
Manu Sporny: q+ to discuss a likely timeline ←
14:18:50 <gkellogg> ivan: Regardless, recent technical discussions will require another LC.
Ivan Herman: Regardless, recent technical discussions will require another LC. ←
14:18:55 <manu> ack manu
Manu Sporny: ack manu ←
14:18:55 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to discuss a likely timeline
Zakim IRC Bot: manu, you wanted to discuss a likely timeline ←
14:19:38 <gkellogg> manu: My opinion is that TAG group won't happen because either Google won't be interested in participating, or Ian Hickson (the editor of Microdata) will just take the Microdata spec and publish it via the WHAT WG.
Manu Sporny: My opinion is that TAG group won't happen because either Google won't be interested in participating, or Ian Hickson (the editor of Microdata) will just take the Microdata spec and publish it via the WHAT WG. ←
14:19:52 <gkellogg> … bottom line is that we continue with current the direction of the technical work on RDFa 1.1 Core, do another Last Call, then a Candidate Rec and then continue onward toward REC.
… bottom line is that we continue with current the direction of the technical work on RDFa 1.1 Core, do another Last Call, then a Candidate Rec and then continue onward toward REC. ←
14:22:47 <gkellogg> manu: other issue is that the TAG announcement is causing some of the RDFa people to backpedal because there is this perception that RDFa 1.1 could be completely killed off.
Manu Sporny: other issue is that the TAG announcement is causing some of the RDFa people to backpedal because there is this perception that RDFa 1.1 could be completely killed off. ←
14:23:00 <gkellogg> … EPub folks are worried that RDFa is "at risk".
… EPub folks are worried that RDFa is "at risk". ←
14:23:42 <gkellogg> … I suggested that they shouldn't make that assumption, but they are completing next week and are worried that they can't reference a spec that is in the state that RDFa and Microdata are in.
… I suggested that they shouldn't make that assumption, but they are completing next week and are worried that they can't reference a spec that is in the state that RDFa and Microdata are in. ←
14:23:54 <gkellogg> … they are now discussing the notion that they may take out the reference to the RDFa spec.
… they are now discussing the notion that they may take out the reference to the RDFa spec. ←
14:24:15 <gkellogg> … result is that the whole state of flux is causing uncertainty in the market - the public is becoming confused about the future of RDFa and Microdata because we haven't been sending a consistent message.
… result is that the whole state of flux is causing uncertainty in the market - the public is becoming confused about the future of RDFa and Microdata because we haven't been sending a consistent message. ←
14:25:05 <gkellogg> … We must start broadcasting a message about the RDFa 1.1 work moving forward and be more assertive about the future of RDFa.
… We must start broadcasting a message about the RDFa 1.1 work moving forward and be more assertive about the future of RDFa. ←
14:29:55 <gkellogg> ivan: we should finalize RDFa 1.1 Core ASAP.
Ivan Herman: we should finalize RDFa 1.1 Core ASAP. ←
14:30:21 <gkellogg> … recent group descriptions put weeks of work ahead of us, we should get on with it.
… recent group descriptions put weeks of work ahead of us, we should get on with it. ←
14:30:40 <gkellogg> … removing @profile and changes to @vocab will create weeks, not days of work.
… removing @profile and changes to @vocab will create weeks, not days of work. ←
14:30:54 <gkellogg> manu: in parallel, we should take public perception into consideration and ensure that people know that RDFa 1.1 has a future and is moving forward.
Manu Sporny: in parallel, we should take public perception into consideration and ensure that people know that RDFa 1.1 has a future and is moving forward. ←
14:31:12 <tinkster> The recent @vocab proposal is actually what I suggested way back when we were introducing @vocab.
Toby Inkster: The recent @vocab proposal is actually what I suggested way back when we were introducing @vocab. ←
14:31:14 <tinkster> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Mar/0174.html
Toby Inkster: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Mar/0174.html ←
14:32:09 <gkellogg> manu: So, we're going to focus on the technical work and getting RDFa 1.1 Core spec into a solid Candidate REC draft. We'll position a solid public message about RDFa 1.1 in parallel.
Manu Sporny: So, we're going to focus on the technical work and getting RDFa 1.1 Core spec into a solid Candidate REC draft. We'll position a solid public message about RDFa 1.1 in parallel. ←
14:32:28 <manu> Topic: Vocabulary Expansion Proposal
14:32:32 <manu> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Aug/0007.html
Manu Sporny: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Aug/0007.html ←
14:33:07 <gkellogg> ivan: recent mail slightly modifies it
Ivan Herman: recent mail slightly modifies it ←
14:33:32 <gkellogg> manu: a couple of comments on the proposal - RDF/XML and TURTLE requirement and putting rdfa:vocab declarations into the default graph.
Manu Sporny: a couple of comments on the proposal - RDF/XML and TURTLE requirement and putting rdfa:vocab declarations into the default graph. ←
14:33:44 <gkellogg> ivan: that's a different feature, somewhat independent.
Ivan Herman: that's a different feature, somewhat independent. ←
14:34:33 <gkellogg> ivan: The overall goal of the vocab expansion proposal is that dereferencing the @vocab URI yields a small ontology which we can then post-process using SemWeb tools to enhance default graph.
Ivan Herman: The overall goal of the vocab expansion proposal is that dereferencing the @vocab URI yields a small ontology which we can then post-process using SemWeb tools to enhance default graph. ←
14:34:49 <gkellogg> … it allows for subProperty/subClass to enhance default graph.
… it allows for subProperty/subClass to enhance default graph. ←
14:35:03 <gkellogg> … it ensures work we need to do is as small as possible.
… it ensures work we need to do is as small as possible. ←
14:35:20 <gkellogg> … core RDF people have defined semantics and we should refer to them.
… core RDF people have defined semantics and we should refer to them. ←
14:36:09 <gkellogg> … refer to RDF semantics instead of our own default graph expansion rules - use a restricted version of RDFS (subclass, sub property, …)
… refer to RDF semantics instead of our own default graph expansion rules - use a restricted version of RDFS (subclass, sub property, …) ←
14:36:32 <gkellogg> … RDFS has set of informal, but well documented, set of rules.
… RDFS has set of informal, but well documented, set of rules. ←
14:36:52 <gkellogg> … implementation indicates that it seems to work.
… implementation indicates that it seems to work. ←
14:37:22 <manu> q+ to discuss SHOULD for RDF/XML/TURTLE and rdfa:vocab being in default graph
Manu Sporny: q+ to discuss SHOULD for RDF/XML/TURTLE and rdfa:vocab being in default graph ←
14:37:36 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
14:37:49 <gkellogg> … recent change indicates RDFa processors MAY remove original ontology triples from default graph.
… recent change indicates RDFa processors MAY remove original ontology triples from default graph. ←
14:38:37 <gkellogg> … another section on if RDFa processor performs exponsion or not. By default, not, and RDFa processors are not required to perform expansion.
… another section on if RDFa processor performs exponsion or not. By default, not, and RDFa processors are not required to perform expansion. ←
14:38:51 <manu> ack manu
Manu Sporny: ack manu ←
14:38:51 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to discuss SHOULD for RDF/XML/TURTLE and rdfa:vocab being in default graph
Zakim IRC Bot: manu, you wanted to discuss SHOULD for RDF/XML/TURTLE and rdfa:vocab being in default graph ←
14:38:55 <gkellogg> .. Cleanup of work by niklasl & gkellogg
.. Cleanup of work by niklasl & gkellogg ←
14:39:31 <gkellogg> manu: I probably won't implement RDF/XML and Turtle, even though it is a SHOULD.
Manu Sporny: I probably won't implement RDF/XML and Turtle, even though it is a SHOULD. ←
14:39:42 <gkellogg> … probably won't implement @vocab expansion.
… probably won't implement @vocab expansion. ←
14:40:08 <gkellogg> ivan: text doesn't yet pass "Shane test". However, a conformant processor does not have to perform expansion.
Ivan Herman: text doesn't yet pass "Shane test". However, a conformant processor does not have to perform expansion. ←
14:40:39 <gkellogg> … if a processor implements extension, then it MUST accept RDFa, SHOULD accept RDF/XML, Turtle, ...
… if a processor implements extension, then it MUST accept RDFa, SHOULD accept RDF/XML, Turtle, ... ←
14:40:56 <gkellogg> manu: still disagree with SHOULD. Every other RDF format should be a MAY.
Manu Sporny: still disagree with SHOULD. Every other RDF format should be a MAY. ←
14:41:08 <manu> RDFa processor MUST accept an RDF graph serialized in RDFa, and MAY accept other serialization formats of RDF.
Manu Sporny: RDFa processor MUST accept an RDF graph serialized in RDFa, and MAY accept other serialization formats of RDF. ←
14:42:11 <gkellogg> ivan: from position of author of @vocab file, I would need to write down an RDF ontology. 90% of authors would likely write down ontology in Turtle.
Ivan Herman: from position of author of @vocab file, I would need to write down an RDF ontology. 90% of authors would likely write down ontology in Turtle. ←
14:42:33 <gkellogg> … Having to author in RDFa is not important for them.
… Having to author in RDFa is not important for them. ←
14:42:43 <gkellogg> q+ to comment on Turtle/RDFa
q+ to comment on Turtle/RDFa ←
14:43:08 <gkellogg> manu: really need a human readable document to describe @vocab - it must be a best practice.
Manu Sporny: really need a human readable document to describe @vocab - it must be a best practice. ←
14:43:21 <gkellogg> … we should lead people to a best practice.
… we should lead people to a best practice. ←
14:43:31 <niklasl> my view - vocab *processing* is beyond the RDFa processor.
Niklas Lindström: my view - vocab *processing* is beyond the RDFa processor. ←
14:44:00 <gkellogg> manu: we also have a processor graph, perhaps we should use it for @vocab triples.
Manu Sporny: we also have a processor graph, perhaps we should use it for @vocab triples. ←
14:44:19 <gkellogg> … they might not follow the default graph then.
… they might not follow the default graph then. ←
14:44:46 <gkellogg> ivan: let's not conflate issues.
Ivan Herman: let's not conflate issues. ←
14:44:48 <manu> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
14:45:28 <gkellogg> niklasl: my POV is that the processing vocab is beyond what an RDFa processor should do.
Niklas Lindström: my POV is that the processing vocab is beyond what an RDFa processor should do. ←
14:45:47 <gkellogg> … if you need semantic information, it should be up to RDF consumer/reuser
… if you need semantic information, it should be up to RDF consumer/reuser ←
14:46:11 <gkellogg> … we also don't know the context, and it places a "contract" ambiguity for authors
… we also don't know the context, and it places a "contract" ambiguity for authors ←
14:46:22 <gkellogg> … if they publish an @vocab, when should it be used?
… if they publish an @vocab, when should it be used? ←
14:46:37 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:46:43 <gkellogg> … we could leave spec outside RDFa spec, but there could be a contract between publishers and consumers
… we could leave spec outside RDFa spec, but there could be a contract between publishers and consumers ←
14:46:52 <manu> q+ to say that if we don't define it, people won't do it.
Manu Sporny: q+ to say that if we don't define it, people won't do it. ←
14:47:08 <gkellogg> … many vocals already use subClass/subProperty, wouldn't expect to have vocabulary fully expanded.
… many vocals already use subClass/subProperty, wouldn't expect to have vocabulary fully expanded. ←
14:47:35 <gkellogg> … why concept of proxyProperty/proxyClass was designed, to constrain the expansion and simplify authoring.
… why concept of proxyProperty/proxyClass was designed, to constrain the expansion and simplify authoring. ←
14:47:41 <gkellogg> … could be defined outside of RDFa.
… could be defined outside of RDFa. ←
14:47:44 <manu> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
14:47:44 <Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to comment on Turtle/RDFa
Zakim IRC Bot: gkellogg, you wanted to comment on Turtle/RDFa ←
14:48:31 <manu> gkellogg: Going back to SHOULD for RDF/XML and TURTLE - from a potential vocab authors perspective - I would use TURTLE - getting to RDFa is pretty easy from TURTLE. Getting those triples turned into HTML+RDFa is fairly easy.
Gregg Kellogg: Going back to SHOULD for RDF/XML and TURTLE - from a potential vocab authors perspective - I would use TURTLE - getting to RDFa is pretty easy from TURTLE. Getting those triples turned into HTML+RDFa is fairly easy. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:48:59 <manu> gkellogg: It would be nice to be able to transform a TURTLE document into RDFa - RDF/XML and TURTLE should be a MAY.
Gregg Kellogg: It would be nice to be able to transform a TURTLE document into RDFa - RDF/XML and TURTLE should be a MAY. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:49:15 <gkellogg> ivan: won't fight on SHOULD/MAY, he'll take group consensus.
Ivan Herman: won't fight on SHOULD/MAY, he'll take group consensus. ←
14:49:19 <manu> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
14:50:01 <manu> I think that we should be very careful about what we think is "easy" - converting TURTLE to RDFa is /easy/ once you've written the code - but writing the code is difficult.
Manu Sporny: I think that we should be very careful about what we think is "easy" - converting TURTLE to RDFa is /easy/ once you've written the code - but writing the code is difficult. ←
14:50:28 <gkellogg> … disagree with niklasl; if only thing RDFa processor does is to produce default graph with vocal URIs, the proxy vocal will, in effect, produce an expansion simiar to RDFS.
… disagree with niklasl; if only thing RDFa processor does is to produce default graph with vocal URIs, the proxy vocal will, in effect, produce an expansion simiar to RDFS. ←
14:50:32 <manu> Meaning - it's easy for Gregg to write that code - but very difficult for most Web devs to write that code.
Manu Sporny: Meaning - it's easy for Gregg to write that code - but very difficult for most Web devs to write that code. ←
14:51:04 <gkellogg> … today, in practice, this would not happen, we don't know what are predicates that come from RDFa and which are there as full-blown URIs or CURIEs.
… today, in practice, this would not happen, we don't know what are predicates that come from RDFa and which are there as full-blown URIs or CURIEs. ←
14:51:22 <gkellogg> … theoretically, niklasl is right, but in practice it wouldn't be used.
… theoretically, niklasl is right, but in practice it wouldn't be used. ←
14:51:33 <gkellogg> … leaving us without a replacement for @profile.
… leaving us without a replacement for @profile. ←
14:52:03 <gkellogg> … by putting it (optionally) in the document, we make clear what the intent is, even for people not implementing expansion.
… by putting it (optionally) in the document, we make clear what the intent is, even for people not implementing expansion. ←
14:52:34 <gkellogg> … it becomes fairly easy or straightforward to implement RDFs expansion in a standalone fashion, helping to ensure that it will be implemented.
… it becomes fairly easy or straightforward to implement RDFs expansion in a standalone fashion, helping to ensure that it will be implemented. ←
14:53:04 <gkellogg> … big value to having text in the spec, vs. as a separate doc.
… big value to having text in the spec, vs. as a separate doc. ←
14:53:29 <gkellogg> niklasl: not sure that not expanding is up to the user
Niklas Lindström: not sure that not expanding is up to the user ←
14:53:40 <manu> q?
Manu Sporny: q? ←
14:53:57 <gkellogg> … it will depend on the usage of the RDF produced, we'd rather that it re-use terms from (e.g.) FOAF & GR.
… it will depend on the usage of the RDF produced, we'd rather that it re-use terms from (e.g.) FOAF & GR. ←
14:54:16 <gkellogg> ivan: DERI has started to do this.
Ivan Herman: DERI has started to do this. ←
14:54:45 <gkellogg> … what Schema.rdfs.org people did is pretty much this process for schema.org.
… what Schema.rdfs.org people did is pretty much this process for schema.org. ←
14:55:06 <gkellogg> … there will be a difference between various RDFa processors.
… there will be a difference between various RDFa processors. ←
14:55:33 <gkellogg> … by default you don't do it, but there is a standard way to turn it on for processors that implement.
… by default you don't do it, but there is a standard way to turn it on for processors that implement. ←
14:56:19 <gkellogg> niklas: this will mean that the use of @vocab will be the signal to say that here is something that you should use.
Niklas Lindström: this will mean that the use of @vocab will be the signal to say that here is something that you should use. ←
14:56:55 <gkellogg> … one problem, if you use FOAF, my original idea was to define proxy concept and use RDFS semantics rather than using RDFS directly.
… one problem, if you use FOAF, my original idea was to define proxy concept and use RDFS semantics rather than using RDFS directly. ←
14:57:41 <gkellogg> … I wouldn't necessarily like to have all properties listed in an @vocab document expanded. proxy semantics allows the vocal author to be more specific about which should be expanded.
… I wouldn't necessarily like to have all properties listed in an @vocab document expanded. proxy semantics allows the vocal author to be more specific about which should be expanded. ←
14:57:46 <niklasl> consider - https://gist.github.com/1092350
Niklas Lindström: consider - https://gist.github.com/1092350 ←
14:58:07 <Zakim> -tomayac
Zakim IRC Bot: -tomayac ←
14:58:08 <ShaneM> I agree that it would be wrong to remove the original triple
Shane McCarron: I agree that it would be wrong to remove the original triple ←
14:58:25 <gkellogg> ivan: original RDFS intent is only one that can be relied upon.
Ivan Herman: original RDFS intent is only one that can be relied upon. ←
14:58:41 <gkellogg> … removing an original triple would be wrong, only adding new triples is acceptable.
… removing an original triple would be wrong, only adding new triples is acceptable. ←
14:59:13 <gkellogg> … we must have original triples so that a user has something to rely upon.
… we must have original triples so that a user has something to rely upon. ←
14:59:24 <niklasl> https://github.com/niklasl/rdf-sparql-lab/blob/master/curation/examples/vocab_map.ttl
Niklas Lindström: https://github.com/niklasl/rdf-sparql-lab/blob/master/curation/examples/vocab_map.ttl ←
14:59:33 <tinkster> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Mar/0174.html
Toby Inkster: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Mar/0174.html ←
14:59:34 <gkellogg> q+ to talk about diff between RDFS and PRoxy
q+ to talk about diff between RDFS and PRoxy ←
15:01:54 <gkellogg> manu: is this called "proxy vocab feature" or something else.
Manu Sporny: is this called "proxy vocab feature" or something else. ←
15:02:22 <gkellogg> ivan: in my terminology, it's not a proxy. originally @vocab was just a URI expansion.
Ivan Herman: in my terminology, it's not a proxy. originally @vocab was just a URI expansion. ←
15:02:49 <gkellogg> … perhaps "graph expansion" rather than "triple expansion".
… perhaps "graph expansion" rather than "triple expansion". ←
15:03:27 <gkellogg> shanem: academically appropriate terms doesn't help larger audience. Use marketing principles when naming.
Shane McCarron: academically appropriate terms doesn't help larger audience. Use marketing principles when naming. ←
15:04:04 <gkellogg> MacTed: pithy names turn into term overload issues. names must be chosen carefully.
Ted Thibodeau: pithy names turn into term overload issues. names must be chosen carefully. ←
15:04:08 <gkellogg> manu: Let's go with what we have right now and change the name later if we come up w/ something better.
Manu Sporny: Let's go with what we have right now and change the name later if we come up w/ something better. ←
15:04:14 <manu> ACTION: Niklas to author spec text for the Vocabulary Expansion mechanism with help from Gregg and Shane.
ACTION: Niklas to author spec text for the Vocabulary Expansion mechanism with help from Gregg and Shane. ←
15:04:14 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Niklas
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - Niklas ←
15:04:21 <manu> ack manu
Manu Sporny: ack manu ←
15:04:24 <manu> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
15:04:36 <manu> ACTION - Niklas to author spec text for the Vocabulary Expansion mechanism with help from Gregg and Shane.
Manu Sporny: ACTION - Niklas to author spec text for the Vocabulary Expansion mechanism with help from Gregg and Shane. ←
15:04:36 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - -
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - - ←
15:04:40 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to say that if we don't define it, people won't do it.
Zakim IRC Bot: manu, you wanted to say that if we don't define it, people won't do it. ←
15:04:48 <manu> New ACTION: Niklas to author spec text for the Vocabulary Expansion mechanism with help from Gregg and Shane.
Manu Sporny: New ACTION: Niklas to author spec text for the Vocabulary Expansion mechanism with help from Gregg and Shane. ←
15:04:54 <manu> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
15:04:59 <Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to talk about diff between RDFS and PRoxy
Zakim IRC Bot: gkellogg, you wanted to talk about diff between RDFS and PRoxy ←
15:05:12 <manu> gkellogg: We should just use RDFS instead of re-inventing the wheel...
Gregg Kellogg: We should just use RDFS instead of re-inventing the wheel... [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:05:39 <Zakim> -MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←
15:05:45 <gkellogg> ivan: Let's switch to the discussion of @vocab triples added to graph
Ivan Herman: Let's switch to the discussion of @vocab triples added to graph ←
15:05:47 <manu> Topic: rdfs:vocab in the default graph
15:06:24 <gkellogg> … if you have processor that can't do @vocab expansion, adding @vocab triples allows a separate post-processor to perform expansion.
… if you have processor that can't do @vocab expansion, adding @vocab triples allows a separate post-processor to perform expansion. ←
15:06:48 <gkellogg> … adding information into the graph allows another processor to pick up the expansion.
… adding information into the graph allows another processor to pick up the expansion. ←
15:07:05 <gkellogg> … whether these triples are added to default graph or the processor graph is the issue.
… whether these triples are added to default graph or the processor graph is the issue. ←
15:07:15 <manu> +1 to adding rdfa:vocab info to processor output
Manu Sporny: +1 to adding rdfa:vocab info to processor output ←
15:07:20 <gkellogg> … first question, does this make sense.
… first question, does this make sense. ←
15:07:22 <gkellogg> +1
+1 ←
15:07:27 <ShaneM> +1 to add to the output
Shane McCarron: +1 to add to the output ←
15:07:42 <niklasl> +0 right now..
Niklas Lindström: +0 right now.. ←
15:08:01 <gkellogg> ivan: default vs. processor graph ...
Ivan Herman: default vs. processor graph ... ←
15:08:23 <gkellogg> … reason still in favor of default graph, because processor graph has been used for just warnings and errors.
… reason still in favor of default graph, because processor graph has been used for just warnings and errors. ←
15:08:30 <manu> q+ to say what he uses the processor graph for
Manu Sporny: q+ to say what he uses the processor graph for ←
15:08:45 <niklasl> +1 for processor graph
Niklas Lindström: +1 for processor graph ←
15:08:52 <gkellogg> … for users that don't care, might switch off processor graph.
… for users that don't care, might switch off processor graph. ←
15:09:01 <gkellogg> … still in favor of default graph.
… still in favor of default graph. ←
15:09:05 <gkellogg> +1 for default graph
+1 for default graph ←
15:09:15 <manu> ack manu
Manu Sporny: ack manu ←
15:09:15 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to say what he uses the processor graph for
Zakim IRC Bot: manu, you wanted to say what he uses the processor graph for ←
15:09:52 <gkellogg> manu: I use the processor graph when triples are generated or prefixes declared - for warnings, errors and informational parser output.
Manu Sporny: I use the processor graph when triples are generated or prefixes declared - for warnings, errors and informational parser output. ←
15:10:22 <gkellogg> … I emit a triple for every time xmlns: and @prefix is hit by processor, using proprietary vocabulary.
… I emit a triple for every time xmlns: and @prefix is hit by processor, using proprietary vocabulary. ←
15:11:05 <gkellogg> q+ to talk about use of processor graph in Ruby
q+ to talk about use of processor graph in Ruby ←
15:11:23 <gkellogg> manu: application will decide if it wants @vocab triples expanded.
Manu Sporny: application will decide if it wants @vocab triples expanded. ←
15:11:38 <gkellogg> … application registers callbacks for when triples are generated for the default graph or for the processor graph.
… application registers callbacks for when triples are generated for the default graph or for the processor graph. ←
15:12:06 <gkellogg> … if the application wants to, (rdfa processing in step 1, vocab in step 2)
… if the application wants to, (rdfa processing in step 1, vocab in step 2) ←
15:12:17 <gkellogg> … it can record information for use later.
… it can record information for use later. ←
15:12:28 <niklasl> q+ re. action on or preservation of vocab
Niklas Lindström: q+ re. action on or preservation of vocab ←
15:12:38 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:12:44 <gkellogg> … downside is that the default graph doesn't know how to generate triples, but this leaves it up to application. The application should decide what to do with the @vocab triples.
… downside is that the default graph doesn't know how to generate triples, but this leaves it up to application. The application should decide what to do with the @vocab triples. ←
15:12:54 <manu> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
15:12:54 <Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to talk about use of processor graph in Ruby
Zakim IRC Bot: gkellogg, you wanted to talk about use of processor graph in Ruby ←
15:12:59 <niklasl> q+ to mention action on or preservation of vocab
Niklas Lindström: q+ to mention action on or preservation of vocab ←
15:13:11 <ivan> q later
Ivan Herman: q later ←
15:13:36 <manu> gkellogg: I also use the processor graph for a lot of information - debug output and quite a bit of other information. There won't be many rdfa:vocab triples - so why not just put it in the default graph.
Gregg Kellogg: I also use the processor graph for a lot of information - debug output and quite a bit of other information. There won't be many rdfa:vocab triples - so why not just put it in the default graph. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:13:39 <manu> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
15:13:39 <Zakim> niklasl, you wanted to mention action on or preservation of vocab
Zakim IRC Bot: niklasl, you wanted to mention action on or preservation of vocab ←
15:14:07 <gkellogg> niklasl: in favor of having action by processor.
Niklas Lindström: in favor of having action by processor. ←
15:14:26 <manu> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
15:14:29 <gkellogg> … if you don't want to, you'll still implicitly have reference to data to use for post-processing, using follow-your-nose.
… if you don't want to, you'll still implicitly have reference to data to use for post-processing, using follow-your-nose. ←
15:14:56 <gkellogg> ivan: I also put debug information in the processor graph.
Ivan Herman: I also put debug information in the processor graph. ←
15:15:18 <manu> q+ to say that I'm not talking about one application
Manu Sporny: q+ to say that I'm not talking about one application ←
15:15:27 <gkellogg> … what manu implies is that he has one single application that does whole job, relying on RDFa processor. that application can decide to turn expansion on.
… what manu implies is that he has one single application that does whole job, relying on RDFa processor. that application can decide to turn expansion on. ←
15:15:35 <Zakim> -Knud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Knud ←
15:16:05 <gkellogg> … the point is that a viable setup is that someone extracts RDF from RDFa page and from that point on, that RDF graph is exchanged from one app to the other, meaning that that RDF graph can be sent to an application that doesn't have access to original HTML5.
… the point is that a viable setup is that someone extracts RDF from RDFa page and from that point on, that RDF graph is exchanged from one app to the other, meaning that that RDF graph can be sent to an application that doesn't have access to original HTML5. ←
15:16:41 <gkellogg> … if you want another application to handle expansion is to add entire processor graph, which may contain much irrelevant information.
… if you want another application to handle expansion is to add entire processor graph, which may contain much irrelevant information. ←
15:17:10 <gkellogg> … the prefix information manu referred to may be valuable to the application, but is unimportant from an RDF content point of view.
… the prefix information manu referred to may be valuable to the application, but is unimportant from an RDF content point of view. ←
15:17:17 <gkellogg> … still in favor of default graph.
… still in favor of default graph. ←
15:18:18 <gkellogg> … what niklasl said would seem to take us back to an earlier position requiring processors to need to perform expansion on many vocabularies not originally referenced.
… what niklasl said would seem to take us back to an earlier position requiring processors to need to perform expansion on many vocabularies not originally referenced. ←
15:18:34 <gkellogg> manu: other issue with default graph is that they are like stylesheet triples - useless to most people that don't care about that particular application (stylesheets are useless to RDF folks... RDF vocabulary expansion is useless to people like schema.org)
Manu Sporny: other issue with default graph is that they are like stylesheet triples - useless to most people that don't care about that particular application (stylesheets are useless to RDF folks... RDF vocabulary expansion is useless to people like schema.org) ←
15:18:53 <gkellogg> ivan: not so, prefix triples are like stylesheet, but @vocab triples have deep semantic value.
Ivan Herman: not so, prefix triples are like stylesheet, but @vocab triples have deep semantic value. ←
15:19:13 <gkellogg> … those triples help applications to bind the predicates or classes to vocabularies defined elsewhere; huge difference.
… those triples help applications to bind the predicates or classes to vocabularies defined elsewhere; huge difference. ←
15:19:27 <gkellogg> manu: yes, @vocab triples are of huge use for RDF apps that care about it.
Manu Sporny: yes, @vocab triples are of huge use for RDF apps that care about it. ←
15:19:45 <gkellogg> … but for all other apps, they're effectively like stylesheet triples.
… but for all other apps, they're effectively like stylesheet triples. ←
15:19:52 <gkellogg> … don't feel too strongly on this - could go either way.
… don't feel too strongly on this - could go either way. ←
15:20:15 <gkellogg> … From design perspective it's less related to semantic content of document and more like a stylesheet for RDF apps.
… From design perspective it's less related to semantic content of document and more like a stylesheet for RDF apps. ←
15:20:27 <gkellogg> ivan: default graph would contain all important information in RDFa graph.
Ivan Herman: default graph would contain all important information in RDFa graph. ←
15:20:38 <gkellogg> … in that information is @vocab - which is important.
… in that information is @vocab - which is important. ←
15:20:59 <gkellogg> … @prefix triples don't have same deep semantic information, they are beautifying.
… @prefix triples don't have same deep semantic information, they are beautifying. ←
15:21:20 <gkellogg> manu: saying that @vocab attribute generates an important triple about the document. Not just processing-related, but a triple that has actual semantic value against the document... it signifies, in part, what the document is trying to express. That line of argumentation works for me.
Manu Sporny: saying that @vocab attribute generates an important triple about the document. Not just processing-related, but a triple that has actual semantic value against the document... it signifies, in part, what the document is trying to express. That line of argumentation works for me. ←
15:21:36 <gkellogg> … use this triple and get even more meaning from document.
… use this triple and get even more meaning from document. ←
15:22:22 <gkellogg> niklasl: not convinced. understand principle. A bit uncomfortable with overloading @vocab; we're going back to @profile semantics.
Niklas Lindström: not convinced. understand principle. A bit uncomfortable with overloading @vocab; we're going back to @profile semantics. ←
15:22:37 <gkellogg> … If we had the bandwidth, we could define @profile to do this.
… If we had the bandwidth, we could define @profile to do this. ←
15:22:46 <gkellogg> ivan: been there, done that.
Ivan Herman: been there, done that. ←
15:23:22 <gkellogg> … understand @profile arguments, could go either way.
… understand @profile arguments, could go either way. ←
15:23:34 <gkellogg> … there were some very serious use cases which lead to concept of @profile.
… there were some very serious use cases which lead to concept of @profile. ←
15:23:59 <gkellogg> … it seems @vocab strategy can cover these use cases.
… it seems @vocab strategy can cover these use cases. ←
15:24:15 <gkellogg> … people where care about RDF mapping can use RDFS.
… people where care about RDF mapping can use RDFS. ←
15:24:33 <gkellogg> … use case covered without downside of @profile, can't forget about original use cases.
… use case covered without downside of @profile, can't forget about original use cases. ←
15:24:53 <gkellogg> manu: does @vocab lead to triples in the default graph?
Manu Sporny: does @vocab lead to triples in the default graph? ←
15:24:59 <gkellogg> +1 to default graph
+1 to default graph ←
15:25:04 <ivan> +1 default
Ivan Herman: +1 default ←
15:25:06 <manu> +1 to default graph
Manu Sporny: +1 to default graph ←
15:25:13 <niklasl> +0
Niklas Lindström: +0 ←
15:25:26 <gkellogg> manu: proceed under that assumption, pending feedback from rest of the group.
Manu Sporny: proceed under that assumption, pending feedback from rest of the group. ←
15:26:29 <niklasl> q+ to ask about my membership :)
Niklas Lindström: q+ to ask about my membership :) ←
15:26:33 <gkellogg> ivan: on use of SCM tools, we should work in W3C CVS, not GitHub - Gregg, send me your key. We'll get Niklas' key if he ends up being accepted as an Invited Expert - still processing his paperwork.
Ivan Herman: on use of SCM tools, we should work in W3C CVS, not GitHub - Gregg, send me your key. We'll get Niklas' key if he ends up being accepted as an Invited Expert - still processing his paperwork. ←
15:28:25 <Zakim> -ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: -ShaneM ←
15:28:31 <Zakim> -scor
Zakim IRC Bot: -scor ←
15:35:45 <Zakim> -gkellogg
(No events recorded for 7 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: -gkellogg ←
15:37:05 <Zakim> -manu
Zakim IRC Bot: -manu ←
15:37:07 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
15:37:09 <Zakim> -niklasl
Zakim IRC Bot: -niklasl ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#1) generated 2011-08-11 18:32:22 UTC by 'msporny', comments: 'Minor syntax error cleanups/fixups.'